PDA

View Full Version : Speculation that Players, not Carlisle, will be the ones moving in the offseason...



jcouts
04-10-2006, 03:33 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/5490636

This had become the best rivalry in the NBA this century. With coaches and players seemingly interchangeable between the franchises, not to mention the geographic proximity, there was no better matchup during the regular season or playoffs than the Detroit Pistons and the Indiana Pacers.

Even after the horrid brawl of November, 2004 that sent the NBA and the franchises reeling, they had a great playoff series last spring. Now, all of it appears history in the wake of the Pacers' recent collapse.

1. Item: The Pistons embarrassed the Pacers 98-75 on Sunday afternoon, tagging the Pacers with their second loss in a row and seventh in their last eight games, as they dipped to 36-40 the first time they've been four games below .500 all season.

What this really means: The Pacers now have lost eight of 10 and 10 of 13. Although they are still the seventh seed in the Eastern Conference, they are just one game ahead of the deadlocked Philadelphia 76ers and Chicago Bulls. It is not inconceivable that they drop out of the playoff picture entirely, as the team has lost energy and confidence as Jermaine O'Neal has struggled since returning from a torn groin and Jamal Tinsley continues to be in and out of the lineup. And if things aren't shaky enough, forward Peja Stojakovic went public this week with his desire to opt out of his contract this summer and enter the free agent market.

It's time for a remake for the Pacers, whether it's a sign-and-trade for Stojakovic, checking the value of dealing O'Neal for multiple players or both. Not since they made the big deal for Ron Artest and Brad Miller from the Chicago Bulls have they remade their starting lineup so dramatically, but obviously it's time. No longer can they consider Tinsley their starting point guard for now or the future when he is constantly sidelined with a variety of maladies, then is out again before he regains his conditioning and confidence. Clearly it's time for a change to give coach Rick Carlisle a fresh start from the stench created by Artest and the injuries that followed.



Whether Carlisle goes or players go, or both, changes need to be made to erase all of the uncertainty. The entire franchise just seems to be one big ball of uncertainty. With the exception of a few players, we have a roster full of guys who perform well one night and vanish the next. When a team like Detroit, San Antonio or Dallas loses a game, they know exactly why they lost the game. If the great championship teams of the past lost a game, they usually knew exactly why they lost the game, or which player had the off night. With the Pacers, we never really know why we lost a game, because there were so many things that went wrong, or weren't expected.

Foster and Pollard are about the only players on the roster that you know exactly what you'll be getting night in and night out. Granger is borderline, only because of a lack of experience. AJ and Jax are borderline as well. Is it them, or is it the system?

JO can't quietly score 20...he only scores 20 if the ball is fed inside to him repeatedly.

I will say this in Rick's defense, after the brawl happened last year and things went awry, he still ran the system the way he prefers to...and turned a nightmare into somewhat of a feelgood story.

This year, he has changed his style to that of the players' demands...and look at where it's taking us.

CableKC
04-10-2006, 03:46 PM
After the Pistons blowout....I don't know what to think of the team. The only thing that I ( for now ) am certain about is that I still think that we should keep JONeal and retool...rather then tear down and rebuild.

I have even wavered in my support of Carlisle. I don't question whether he is a good or bad coach....I'm beginning to question if he is the right coach for this team.

Ragnar
04-10-2006, 04:07 PM
I have even wavered in my support of Carlisle. I don't question whether he is a good or bad coach....I'm beginning to question if he is the right coach for this team.

Bingo this has been my point all along. Clearly Rick is a GOOD coach. But he was not the right coach for this team.

Even in the 61 win season we had a lot of games we should have won but lost due to miss using players. We won a lot at first because the NBA had not scouted us. Once that happened we turned into a .500 team. Then Jamaal was inserted and we wont 75% of the games he played. But the reason for that was Jamaal and Ron broke a lot of Ricks plays.

Last year after the brawl we were the perfect team for Rick Carlisle because our athletic young guys were out. Once they came back he was again not the right coach.

ilive4sports
04-10-2006, 04:22 PM
I agree with both of you 100%. I really like Rick and he is a good coach and maybe a great coach, but i dont think he is the right coach for this team. I also put some blame on the players because right now this team has no heart. You would think after playing with Reggie Miller who gave his all night in and night out that they would do the same. We are struggling for leadership.

Im as big as a fan of JO, but he needs to be a stronger leader. I know he has said stuff saying how the team needs to show some heart out on the court and all, but its clearly not working. I do think we need to keep JO because he is the key to this team and we need to build this team around him.

The players dont listen to JO and they dont listen to Rick. We need to find a coach that they would listen too. And we need players who would listen to the coach. We have some players who do like JO, Granger, Foster and some others, but guys like Jackson and Tinsley don't IMO. This team needs some major changes.

So what do we do? I think we need to get a new coach. Someone that the players would listen too. I know one guy they would listen to but i really dont think he wants to coach right now (yes im talking about Reggie). I dont know who we should get, but a change has to be made. Rick is a good coach, but not for the Pacers. We also need to make major changes to the roster. There are only a handful of players i would like to see return. They are JO, Granger, Foster, Harrison, and Jones. I wouldnt mind seeing the others leave. Austin would be good to keep, but i can deal with us not having him. One move i really want them to make is trade Jackson and Tinsley and get a good PG who can last a full season. Hell even three quarters of the season would be nice. I dont have any specifics as of right now, but moves have to be made.

Will Galen
04-10-2006, 04:29 PM
I think Rick will stay, and I think Larry will get him players that can run. Rick HAS to make basketball fun for the players though, otherwise it will be the same old complaints.

Since86
04-10-2006, 04:41 PM
Bingo this has been my point all along. Clearly Rick is a GOOD coach. But he was not the right coach for this team.

If he's a top coach in the league, and you're already retooling the team, why not keep him?

There's only a handful of better coaches, so why let him walk, when you're already getting rid of players you think are a big part of the problems?

What I'm getting at is, "don't throw the baby, out with the bathwater"

bulldog
04-10-2006, 04:48 PM
Most important thing is a replacement...

You don't fire one of the top NBA coaches without having a really solid replacement in mind. With our personalities, if you switch coaches but keep the players, it'll have to be someone who is well-established and experienced. The PG situation, SJax and JO will tear a college coach or a first-time coach apart, IMHO.

DisplacedKnick
04-10-2006, 04:58 PM
If he's a top coach in the league, and you're already retooling the team, why not keep him?


Well, the argument - which IMO is true - is that he's lost the team.

However, you can get the team back again. Sometimes all it takes is one new player - or even an existing player changing his attitude.

Larry Brown lost the Knicks and they stayed lost for at least a month. He has them back now mainly because of Jamal Crawford and Nate Robinson changing their acts. He's finally gotten over his Veteranitis and the lineup finishing games is now:

Crawford
Robinson
Qyntel Woods
David Lee
Jackie Butler

while players like Steve Francis and Eddy Curry sit and watch. That particular strategy's won the last 3 games and gotten Crawford EC Player of the Week.

So I don't think it's a given that Rick's gone. I have thought that occasionally but I really think the odds are about 50-50.

SoupIsGood
04-10-2006, 07:28 PM
If he's a top coach in the league, and you're already retooling the team, why not keep him?



THANK YOU! :yes:

Kegboy
04-10-2006, 07:57 PM
This article lends towards what I've been thinking. If we do get rid of Rick, right or wrong, the media will be shocked. Rick gained a lot of respect in this league for how we played post brawl, and it won't make sense to get rid of him after another ****ed up year. The spin will be that Larry's 3-year rule is set in stone, especially after firing a friend in Rick, and the job will be seen as less desirable than one would think.

:twocents:

Bball
04-11-2006, 05:24 AM
This article lends towards what I've been thinking. If we do get rid of Rick, right or wrong, the media will be shocked. Rick gained a lot of respect in this league for how we played post brawl, and it won't make sense to get rid of him after another ****ed up year. The spin will be that Larry's 3-year rule is set in stone, especially after firing a friend in Rick, and the job will be seen as less desirable than one would think.

:twocents:

Egads... that's makes lots of sense. And that even makes me wonder about another scenario to dovetail that. Let's say we are trashing the current team... maybe even trading JO for expiring contracts as mentioned in the article Kstat posted... Would we want to have our next coach with that team in its infancy or would we (TPTB) rather Carlisle finish his 4th year (lame duck or not) and THEN look to make a coaching change? That would certainly save the Simons some money. And it would forestall the '3 year rule' from kicking in on the new coach before the team had a season to learn each other and for management to make some evaluations and tweaks...

Hmmmmm....

Would they think that way?

-Bball

Downtown Threat
04-11-2006, 06:37 AM
I hope you don't mind a Kings fan giving his opinion but here is my $0.02 worth anyway.

Things need to change but I honestly don't think the coach is the problem. RC has shown in the past that he is a good coach who can take the team to the play-offs. He dmands a lot from his players for the right reasons too. He is strong on defence and while he can over-do it with his play calling, overall he is a very good coach. If you are to replace him there will be no one out there that is an upgrade. Maybe Adelman but I am hoping he stays wit us.

As far as players are concerned, you would be mad to trade JO unless you are replacing him with a PF/C of similar ilk. I have long been a fan of JO and not that long ago he was clerly the best PF in the east. He is a 20/10, 2 bpg type player. Those player are as rare as hen's teeth and when you have one, you bloody make sure you hold onto him. As a Kings fan I should know ;)

Granger is obviously another player that you must keep. The kid is a gun. You don't give up a talent like him unless you are getting better talent in return.

I also think that you should keep Pedja at a reasonable price as he is a reliable player that scores efficiently and as good a 2nd option as you could hope to have.

With JO, Pedja and Granger you have a very good core to build around.

Now everyone else is expandable and fair game. You must get rid off Tinsley to clear his salary if nothing else. Jackson is a prima dona that is just a distraction.

One player that I am a fan of is Foster. To me he is the ultimate role player. He will bust his gut every minute he is on that floor. He will do all the little things that make a lot of difference. He is worth more to the team than his stats show.

Big need is a PG and SG IMHO.

BillS
04-11-2006, 08:37 AM
Question - if you have changed the majority of the team, including its leadership on the floor, wouldn't that reset the "3-year rule"? Why would players who have never worked under a coach suddenly tune him out because he had been in the city 3 years before they got there?

Since86
04-11-2006, 03:38 PM
There is no "3-year rule."

That was a complete cop out for Larry to only last a minimal amount of time.
Winning coaches, except Larry Brown, all stay way longer than 3 years at one place, with one team.